Wednesday, June 11, 2008

I know which "argument" I'd prefer to "import"

[Khurrum Awan] said that the argument for limitless free speech "is really a far-right Republican argument that is being imported into this country."
Try as I might, I simply cannot get this line out of my head. It encapsulates so perfectly the shameless muddle of ignorance, entitlement, bigotry, and something verging on sedition that drives the sock puppets (and their HRC enablers) to recreate Canada in their own, disturbingly self-interested image.


1) That no one, absolutely no one, is advocating "limitless free speech". There is, always has been, and always will be a very clear line distinguishing controversial opinion from direct incitement to violence and hatred. There's your limit.

2) That freedom of speech most assuredly is not "a far right Republican argument" nor, indeed, is it being "imported into this country." Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment of the American Constitution (not a partisan document that I'm aware of)*; freedom of expression is protected by the Canadian Charter.

3) That Mr. Awan does not scruple to imply that American ideas--simply because they are American, mind you--have no business in Canadian society, on Canadian lips, or even in Canadian heads ... I should've left that door (the one marked Argument from Xenophobia) quite firmly shut if I were him. But seeing as it's now been thrown wide, I think it's safe to ask: what country is Mr. Awan importing his ideas from?

Here's a clue.

... And it's the Americans (Peace Be Upon Them) I'm supposed to be wary of?


*Of course, it is clear that what Mr. Awan means to say is that anything expressing a "far right Republican viewpoint" is, of itself, hate speech.